Amazon Patents Floating Airship Warehouse For Its Delivery Drones (techcrunch.com) 94
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: We've known about Amazon's drone delivery ambitions since 2013. But patent filings from Amazon, circulated today by CB Insights' Zoe Leavitt, reveal more details about how the e-commerce titan could make drone deliveries work at scale, namely through "airborne fulfillment centers." Yes, that's a warehouse in a zeppelin. The airborne fulfillment centers, or AFCs, would be stocked with a certain amount of inventory and positioned near a location where Amazon predicts demand for certain items will soon spike. Drones, including temperature-controlled models ideally suited for food delivery, could be stocked at the AFCs and sent down to make a precise, safe scheduled or on-demand delivery. An example cited in the filing was around a sporting event. If there's a big championship game down below, Amazon AFC's above could be loaded with snacks and souvenirs sports fans crave. The AFCs could be flown close to a stadium to deliver audio or outdoor display advertising near the main event, as well, the filing suggested. The patent reflects a complex network of systems to facilitate delivery by air. Besides the airborne fulfillment centers and affiliated drones, the company has envisioned larger shuttles that could carry people, supplies and drones to the AFCs or back to the ground. Using a larger shuttle to bring drones up to the AFC would allow Amazon to reserve their drones' power for making deliveries only. Of course, all these elements would be connected to inventory management systems, and other software and remote computing resources managed by people in the air or on the ground. The filing also reveals that the shuttles and drones, as they fly deliveries around, could function in a mesh network, relaying data to each other about weather, wind speed and routing, for example, or beaming e-book content down to readers on the ground. Amazon also recently patented a system to defend its drones against hackers, jammers and bows and arrows.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: This is retarded. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, I think its pretty cool, but I also think they shouldn't be able to patent an idea they can't yet build.
They shouldn't be able to patent ideas at all, only specific implementations.
A new propeller design that can be used on a drone: Patentable.
Using that drone to deliver Chinese food: Not patentable.
And it's steam powered too (Score:5, Informative)
Actually launching and retrieving flying vehiclies from massive airships is nothing new. the US Akron and US Macon were blimp aircraft carriers carring multiple planes able to both launch and retrieve.
http://www.airships.net/us-nav... [airships.net]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
http://www.history.com/topics/... [history.com]
the russians even built planes that other planes could launch from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
and Darpa still wants these:
http://www.popsci.com/article/... [popsci.com]
and both the russians and Lockeed developed concept aircraft based on nuclear powered super planes with runways built into them:
https://forums.spacebattles.co... [spacebattles.com]
russina surface effects nuclear powered sea skimmer concept:
http://englishrussia.com/2015/... [englishrussia.com]
Re: (Score:1)
But could they do it *on the Internet*??
Re: (Score:3)
Yup, and posting about it is nothing new either.
https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org]
Re: And it's steam powered too (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Can we PLEASE STOP using precious and irreplaceable Rare Earth elements, you know Helium (He), for STUPID SHIT like this.
There is no reason today's blimps can't be made to safely use Hydrogen (H).
And no real reason to use blimps in the first place.
Let alone fill and UTTERLY WASTE millions of little kids ballons with He every year either.
Teach them about Hydrogen or resource depletion and conservation instead.
Re: (Score:2)
And no real reason to use blimps in the first place.
Airships are good for lots of things, that they aren't good for everything doesn't change that at all. You're right about the H and He though.
Re: (Score:2)
US Akron and US Macon were blimp aircraft carriers carring multiple planes able to both launch and retrieve.
And both crashed in storms, as will Amazon's hare-brained idea if it ever (ahem) gets off the ground.
Re:FAA TFRs (Score:4, Interesting)
Flight restrictions around sporting events? Is it even legal to have an outdoor NFL game without a flyover?
Re: (Score:2)
Black Sunday 77 remake plot
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, this is the problematic part:
An example cited in the filing was around a sporting event. If there’s a big championship game down below, Amazon AFC’s above could be loaded with snacks and souvenirs sports fans crave.
Do you really think the stadium owners will allow someone else to cut in on the revenue of the food and souvenirs they sell? They'd be asking for such a big cut that Amazon would barely make any money.
Besides which, the first time a drone drops out of the sky, there's real trouble. Out in the wider world, if a drone malfunctions and falls, there's only a small chance it will actually hit someone. Inside a stadium, the odds go way up.
Re: (Score:3)
Besides which, the first time a drone drops out of the sky, there's real trouble. Out in the wider world, if a drone malfunctions and falls, there's only a small chance it will actually hit someone. Inside a stadium, the odds go way up.
God as my witness, I thought these turkey drones could fly!
Re: (Score:1)
Whoever wrote this patent example obviously knows nothing about FAA security and flight restrictions around sporting events and other assemblies. Not gonna happen.
Exactly what makes it so disruptive and lucrative. Probably will float one over the Whitehouse too with a giant "You can't TRUMP these discounts!!!" (With an obvious 15% going to his majesty of course).
Re: FAA TFRs (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Or a lot of helium.
Re: (Score:3)
Or a lot of helium.
Maybe if they hired the right managers all that hot air could be put to actual use.
Re: (Score:2)
These things will be death traps! Has everybody forgotten about the Hindenburg?!?!
The Hindenberg used hydrogen. Hydrogen is highly flammable. Helium is not.
I can't believe I even have to post this. I guess Poe's Law made me do it.
Re: (Score:2)
wonder if this will have the patented arrow defense as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really needed.... you could shoot at WW1 zeppelins all day as the hydrogen wasn't kept at high pressures. They just had a guy wandering around with a bucket of epoxy to patch holes. It wasn't until the incendiary bullets that they had any major issues.
Re: (Score:2)
What sealed the fate of the Hindenburg was the following:
- damp mooring lines (from rain) that could conduct electricity between the ship and the ground
- a thunderstorm that increased the strength of ambient electric fields
- a tear in the ship's outer skin that exposed the metal frame and caused a leak of hydrogen to the outside
All of this caused a discharge between the mooring lines and the metal frame in the vicinity of a leak. Kaboom.
Re: (Score:2)
Hydrogen in a rigid airship is kept in bladders, a tear in the outer covering wouldn't cause a massive leak. A blimp is a different story where the craft is kept rigid by pressurized gas. A zeppelin is NOT a blimp. Different animal even if they look similar from the outside.
Re: (Score:2)
So painting the rigid exterior (that's not air tight, FYI) in rocket fuel had no impact on the flammability? I'm curious why you would leave that off your list
Re: (Score:2)
The Hindenberg used hydrogen. Hydrogen is highly flammable. Helium is not.
Pretty much all the helium airships crashed as well. Maybe not crashed and burned, but well and truly crashed. And some of the hydrogen airships survived until decommissioned. Fire is far from the only enemy of airships.
Try reading at least the headline (Score:2)
Traditionally at Slashdot, we don't read the article.
We do, however, read the headline, which generally gives a grossly exaggerated and politically skewed summary of the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
Given many of the comments these days, I am not convinced that many people (or bots, can't really tell) even endeavor to read The Fine Headline.
Maybe we should limit everything to 140 characters. Works for the Prez...
Re: (Score:1)
Obama tweets?
Re: (Score:3)
Floating in the air takes a lot of energy.
You fail at physics. [wikipedia.org]
oh the humanity (Score:2, Funny)
oh the humanity
Re: oh the humanity (Score:1)
Huge manatee? Where?
Amazeppelins! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Prototype? (Score:5, Insightful)
When did we start patenting imaginary ideas without proof they work?
It has been standard practice since the mid-1980s.
The patent system has been converted into a system for large corporations to erect entry barriers and hobbles for competitors. They can afford to create a portfolio of merit-less patents to use as legal weapons against competitors and defenses against other large corporations with similar merit-less patent portfolios.
Invention, innovation, advancing the public good through demonstrations of superior art, have almost nothing to do with it anymore, except accidentally. But the corporations are very happy, and that's what count these days.
we need a troll trace for patent trolls! (Score:2)
we need a troll trace for patent trolls!
Black Sunday (Score:2)
Think of the possibilities! (Score:4, Interesting)
Blimps (or Zeppelins, if you really want to make them rigid instead) suffer from the combination of two problems: They're huge and fragile. Which is not as much a problem as long as there is no good reason to force it to come down, That's why those ad blimps you see at sporting events are flying up there. What's to gain by making it crash?
It's a WHOLE different matter if that blimp is filled to the brim with merchandise that I might like or flying over a target that I might not like.
Re: (Score:3)
They aren't terribly fragile, there is a fair amount of redundancy in modern ones. But junk filled dirigibles floating over major cities? What kind of dystopic future is that? Of course, since you have the thing up there, you would just have to put advertising on it. And communications gear. If you think that the FBI wandering over Baltimore with a Cessna and a high res camera is a problem, wait until you see these things....
And since I'm annoyed and over tired, why the hell is this idiot general con
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Practicality be shagged, I fucking totally love Zeppelins.
Re: (Score:3)
Blimps or Zeppelins
In your scenario they are called piñatas.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you think they could be brought down? They aren't really vulnerable to small arms fire. If you built a fleet of sizable quadcopter drones with fuel supplies and flamethrowers you might be able to do it. But I think we can trust people not to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
Why?
Ponder this: This blimp carries a few thousand bucks worth of merch. Now imagine you could make it crash where you can steal that easily.
That's the upper level of what you should invest into bringing it down.
Re: (Score:2)
You probably can't make it crash. And if you try you'll get caught and go to prison for a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
The British air force in WWI had a very difficult time taking down German Zeppelins that were bombing their cities with impunity for two and a half years. [pbs.org] It was only the invention of the incendiary round, combined with the use of hydrogen as the lifting gas, which eventually made them vulnerable targets. If Germany had adequate supplies of helium, the Zeppelins might be remembered as invulnerable terror weapons like the V2 rockets are.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but we're talking about VERY different times. The average consumer drone has a better lift/drag ratio than military plane of that time. They're also not dependent on oxygen for pilots and engines and hence can without a problem climb a lot higher.
Re: (Score:1)
At last a suitable target for sky pirates. The steampunks must be wetting themselves with excitement. (And, of course, with condensation. All that steam has to go somewhere.)
Cool! (Score:2)
Eh No... (Score:3)
Actually the Hydrogen Blimps used in the World War were notoriously difficult to shoot down. The planes that eventually pulled it off were using explosive / incendiary rounds to pull it off. Regular bullets just wizz right through leaving holes. Nevermind the fact that firing your gun in the air in a populated area (this kind of distribution only really is effective in a city.) is probably going to get you in trouble. Nowadys they don't use hydrogen in Blimps. The Hindenberg mostly went up in a firebal
Re: (Score:2)
But my fantasy is to shoot them down with a P-51 Mustang.
You should probably plan to use a scale P-51. That's an awfully small and slow-moving target to attack with the real thing.
I don't get it (Score:3)
Ideally suited for food delivery? Most food I know that people eat at sporting events is heated, requires heavy equipment to prepare/serve, etc. I don't get it.
Re: (Score:1)
Traffic issues, a place to sell the items, labor costs, only able to sell to individuals in the immediate vicinity (1000 in the local area vs 100,000 in the entire event area) to name a few.
Re: (Score:1)
Really dumb. (Score:2)
We are doomed to repeat the same mistakes of previous generations, it seems. The Hindenburg, the best of German engineering, needed special mooring masts, could not survive and had to evade rough weather, and overall had a horrible safety record, around a thousand times worse than modern planes.
Doctor Who (Score:2)
There was an audio drama episode of Doctor Who from Big Finish titled The Warehouse [bigfinish.com], episode 202 of the monthly series, that dealt with something similar except the warehouse was in orbit. Big Finish creates audio dramas featuring the Doctors before the latest return to TV and gets the actors to reprise their roles. I'm enjoying them much more than what Steven Moffat has been putting out over the last couple of seasons.
Well, now we know (Score:2)
Wile E. Coyote really does work for Amazon.
disaster relief? (Score:4, Insightful)
Amazon could position their zepellins near areas affected by natural disasters, where they could supply the needy with clean water, blankets, clothes, food
Re: (Score:2)
Naw, the government would make that illegal. Can't have anyone profiteering on a disaster after all! People are required to just suffer with whatever emergency supplies are already in the area rather than pay a higher price for someone to hurry up and bring some in.
Re: (Score:2)
People are required to just suffer with whatever emergency supplies are already in the area rather than pay a higher price for someone to hurry up and bring some in.
They won't have to pay a higher price, because Amazon can make a profit without jacking up their prices to take advantage of a natural disaster.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
If Amazon makes a profit doing that, they'll get in trouble for "price gouging". It makes more business sense not to sell needed equipment or supplies to disaster victims.
Certainly it doesn't make business sense to make any special effort to bring needed goods to disaster victims for sale -- because if they charge extra to cover the extra costs it's "price gouging" again. That really too bad for disaster victims who need stuff and would be willing to pay to make it worth Amazon's trouble.
Re: (Score:1)
Tell them about it - http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacg... [uspto.gov]
Very wasteful idea (Score:2)
I can't decide ... (Score:2)
If there's a big championship game down below, Amazon AFC's above could be loaded with snacks and souvenirs sports fans crave.
or Snow Crash
Amazon also recently patented a system to defend its drones against hackers, jammers and bows and arrows
Amazon? (Score:1)
For apple? (Score:1)
The only thing I can think where this would be a thing would be when Apple comes out with the next super-dooper phone. I know guys that HAVE to have it the moment it comes out. Their old phone is already sold to someone else.
Other than that, I don't see this as a viable business. Weather can doom it as well. Hope I don't have to fly around these things.